It’s risky to mention evolution in Georgia — perhaps because citizens are not highly evolved in their appreciation for science. As a believer in evolution, however, I think I’ve discovered a major turning point.

Recent events lead me to conclude that the evolution of humankind has hit a dead end and is backtracking. We’re devolving toward that common ancestor with the monkey. In a few hundred thousand years, if we do not destroy the planet in the meantime, our descendants could go back to walking on four feet instead of upright.

Nowhere is the reversal as prevalent as in social skills. It took hundreds of thousands of years for humans to develop the myriad social networks and languages. But with the advent of email, text messaging and computer social networks, virtual interaction is replacing personal interaction.

People with no one to talk to in the real world may have hundreds of “friends” on their Facebook pages for whom they post several times a day about the minutia of their lifeless lives. In a generation or two, no real work will be done because everyone will spend all their waking hours on Facebook, MySpace, Twitter or texting via their phones.

Devolution permeates the media. The most trusted news show is on Comedy Central. No one is creating clever, intelligent TV programs because what the public wants is to watch other people’s “reality,” which is not reality at all but a parody of reality. Stupid, it appears, is the new “smart.” Who would have thought that we could go backwards from “Gilligan’s Island”?

That brings us to governance and politics.

America is built on representative government that, while founded on the Constitution, evolved over nearly 250 years. Today, we’re going backwards. Power is being removed from the public and vested with the elite. Legislation is not determined by the will of the public, but by the dollars invested by the corporations who stand to be affected by the legislation, and the public happily endorses its loss as progress.

Information once came to us via trusted sources, from parents to teachers to reporters. Now credibility is immaterial; what counts is that we hear what we want to hear. Confirmation trumps data. Even squirrels are more interested in where to find acorns than on whom to blame for their scarcity.

Civility wanes. It’s all about me, and it’s acceptable for me to be rude, insulting, annoying and threatening online, on the road, in public meetings. Chimpanzees have superior social skills.

It’s time to teach the theory of devolution. Darwin just saw half of the picture.

The problem with these United States is we are no longer “one nation under God, indivisible”. For one, whatever your religious beliefs are or are not, God in our lives gave us a desire to live a bit differently. We used to believe in treating others as we wanted to be treated. We feared consequence. We were not the center of our own universe. There was a higher power – and while I always had a problem with the term “God fearing” a belief in God helped to keep us in line. The absence of God or the fear of consequences in our lives is now obvious in everything - our crime rates, our actions, and our personal behavior.

We’re divided. With any given political poll (after the first few months of a honeymoon period) we as a nation are generally split down the middle on any given issue. There is no consensus, little respect or tolerance for those who think differently than we do. The news media creates controversy – that sells. The controversy they create keeps us split – and the cycle continues. Facebook and every other interaction thief will only make this worse. I’ve found when we actually sit and talk to others, the differences aren’t really that great. We all love our families; we all want the best for the ones we love. We all want respect. The keyboard takes away interaction; it gives us extra muscles – we become much different and not in a good way.
I wished you were right – we were reversing – then maybe we could stop about where we were in 1962 – take the lessons we learned over the next 47 years and start all over. I could use a little Andy Griffeth right now.

Good article. Tv has made us dumber substantially. Now reality tv has wiped out the remaining IQ. The interest in twitter and facebook will morph into niche interests. No one cares about the posts on FB or twitter unless they are relevant to them. What people had for lunch or the fact that they "are going to sleep" is about as relevant as newspapers made of trees will be in 5 years.

One of the points you were trying to make was obviously aimed at the town hall meetings where much anger against President Obama's health care plan was displayed. I agree it was rude and uncalled for – but - why is it only pointed out in the press when it's from the conservative half of our populous? President Bush was so disrespected by the far left it opened the door for recent events - conservatives seemed to have learned the only way to be heard is to be loud. There is most certainly a double standard in this country – even the apes could figure that one out.

Well said! I totally agree. I am in my 30's and I went to an adult birthday party last year where all the women sat staring at their phones and texting to each other -- in the same room! I did not have texting so I had no idea what was going on and I don't even think they knew I was there. All they saw was what was on their phones. I was invited again this year. I passed on the invitation.

I am very concerned for my kids social skills and spelling. It's hard to encourage something when it goes against the social norm for the times.

There was once some limit on what was reported; if a politician was fooling around on his wife the reporters knew it but didn't report because it was a personal matter. Now with the 24 hour news channels and internet bloggers every scrap of very personal news is there for public consumption. There is a "gotcha" mentality in reporting where being first is more important than being thoughtful or right. It does away with the respect once felt for those in authority and if we have no respect for them why on earth treat them with courtesy?

Wherever those in the public eye go they are photographed and documented. Over exposure about their lives leads to us feeling like we know everything there is to know about them. A false assumption but there nevertheless.

We have recently learned that our government used tactics that we thought only the "other guys" used to get information to "protect" us. That makes us feel bad about ourselves as a people and leads to a further eroding of respect for our national leaders.

It is like the genie has come out of the bottle and we have no idea how to bottle it up again.

I - along with about 70% of the population don't feel bad in the least bit with regards to interrogation methods we used. We caught bad guys and saved good people's lives. Do you really feel the need to feel bad about that? I am appreciative. Our "tactics" did not result in a loss of life - there were no beheadings that I remember. The other "guys" as you call them (I call them terrorist) not only beheaded innocent people - but played it on the internet. Are you really foolish enough to compare the two?

Did the harsh tactics save people's lives? How do you know? A witness to the interrogations has stated that the "softer" tactics yielded better, more reliable intel. Where do you get your intel? Hannity?

I think if you read the full reports you'll see that the amount of useful information increased after the enhanced techniques. That's a fact - even if it was reported by Hannity, Al Franken or Micky Mouse. Sorry - but it's true.

What full reports? Written by whom? Where are these reports? Have you read them? I'm not being difficult, I'd just like a citation to something someone published and put their name on. And no, a "fact" reported by a prostitute like Hannity or a politician like Franken is not necessarily a fact.

From the Washington Post below - and just because you refuse to believe it - doesn't mean it isn't true. You've resorted to name calling - I guess you're frustrated. Now don't go busting out windows at a DNC building and blaiming it on a conservative racist just because you're not going to get your way.

In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Barack Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists “did not make us safer.” This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public — in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
Consider the Justice Department memo of May 30, 2005. It notes that “the CIA believes ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why Al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.’ … In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including (Khalid Sheik Mohammed) and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques.” The memo continues: “Before the CIA used enhanced techniques … KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, ‘Soon you will find out.’ ” Once the techniques were applied, “interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding Al Qaeda and its affiliates.”
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques “led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the ‘Second Wave,’ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.” KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantánamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that “information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave.’ “ In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.

I'll leave you with this, because it's obvious you've bought into the war mongoring and there's no way to change your mind: the facts aren't there, and it's sad you can't see the forest for the trees. Here's a reason your "mainstream media" hasn't reported the torture that you claimed worked; the reasoning isn't there. The facts in the memos basically prove that there may have been planned attacks. We have received no word of a specific attack; no specific attack was thwarted and we have never, ever proven that any information given was an actual link to a planned attack. Literally for all we know, the information was produced to stop the torture; makes sense doesn't it? Here's what the mainstream media has reported: take your pick.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/did-torture-work/investigations/

(This is a good one) ---> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/12/11/BL2007121101053.html

These are from bloggers, newspaper journalists, and government officials (like General Powell's assistant). When the bulk of the evidence points in one direction, people like Dick Cheney will try to find thing that could be construed into maybe, possibly fitting in with their side of the story. But there's only so far that will take you.

My dear, the reasoning and the proof it worked is in the fact there has not been another attack. Do you think they just "stopped hatin'"? I am far from a war monger. I spent 2 years in country. I've seen first hand the horror of war, but I also know it is sometimes a necessary evil. Especically when you're attacked first. What do you have to say to the fact that since these techniques were stopped, we've had the deadliest month in years?

First of all, I don't know where you got the "70%" figure, but that's way way off. Actually a large portion of public isn't very comfortable with us doing the same things that the "other guys" do. And if you'd like to always call them terrorists, then I'm okay with that too. I don't want to take the same actions that the terrorists take when they have hostages. We would simply no longer have a moral highground to stand on. Period. And in these last documents released just this week, there were lives lost and no one actually knows the value of the information gained. No, we certainly did not behead anyone, tape it, and then broadcast, you are correct. But I believe the documentation stated that the interrogators repeatatively beat a combatant in the head with a metal flashlight; that person later died. We threatened to bring in combatants families, rape their wives and kill their children. It's all sadly documented. Now, I think we can all agree that we do need to use tactics that keep us safe. But wouldn't you lie to get out of that situation? The actions that I just described above are not American, they are not America. I wouldn't want that put in a brochure about our country. To make any claim in the world, we must take a road higher than that of our enemies. We are not on this Earth alone, contrary to what the popular belief seems to be. It does matter what other people think of us. I am rooted deeply enough in fact, and so was "Gail" to make the claim that the two are comparable. They are very comparable now that the actions we took are actually coming into the light of public knowledge. Surely you aren't foolish enough to say that this is the right thing to do?

Yes - it worked. It saved lives. So I am foolish enough to say it was the right thing to do. Don't forget - we were attacked on our soil.

Even President Obama has changed his stance. He is calling for his own methods, which are probably different than the previous administrations - but I'll bet you it more than saying "pretty please, let us know where the next attack may occur".

Whoa whoa whoa...you won't get away with that so easily, like the previous president did. The attacked on our own soil argument works when we're talking about the war in afghanistan, but I don't believe that's where the occurences we're speaking of took place. You see, the Bush administration muddied the waters with "war on terror"...a war on an adjective. Then subsequently only fought the war in Iraq. They also had prisoners tortured to say that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. And there was not. None. Not one. No where. Those are the facts. So before you call yourself foolish enough to make an argument, make sure you're actually focusing on the one you should be. Trying to be duplicitous helps no one and does nothing to prove your point.

ROTFL... Surely I am not the only one who sees the comic irony here. I mean, we're all reading an online newspaper and commenting via an electronic message board. Before we blast all of the social networking sites, text messaging, email, and the internet for the de-evolution of modern communication, please take a moment to consider how we have ALL come to benefit from these technological advances. We have access to more information, more readily than ever before in human history. If knowledge is power, then we all now have more power at our disposal than we've EVER had before. The question is, "What are we going to do with it?"

The answer to that would be HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. We have more ways than ever now to do this. Just be careful what you say-might seem '"fishy" or something and you never know who'e watching and listening. Welcome to the age of all the wonderful tools like the internet, google, blogs and facebooks that allow us to express ourselves and learn about things... But also welcome to the age of this information and seeking of information being looked at and observed by others who may not have your best interest at heart.

I agree with you that we need to hold people accountable, but first and foremost, we need to hold OURSELVES accountable. Suppose that we could get rid of all the crooked politicians, greedy CEO's, biased media outlets, and the like, what next? Who, then is willing to step in, clean up the mess, and take on the incredibly difficult task of making things right? Those unscrupulous people who don't have our best interest at heart can only control us as long as we let them. If you think that we as a society or country are "de-evolving", then take action. The significant word here being "action."
There's a reason why the WWII generation is known as the "greatest generation." They've earned it! They saw the world "de-evolving" right before their eyes and stepped up to do something about--Thank God! I shudder at the thought of what might have been if they had just sat around bemoaning the circumstances at hand. Instead, they stepped up, took action, made the sacrifices, and did the dirty work to propel us forward. There's no reason why we can't do that again, we just have to be willing.

Technology is a great tool for knowledge, but not for socialization. People are able to spill there guts while hiding behind a screen but amazingly so many can't even make eye contact with someone or smile at someone walking by. Pretty sad since human contact is so important in nurturing a soul.

It seems this has evolved into a blog on the War (or Wars). Does anyone ever remember that we were attacked on our soil? Those horrific pictures on almost 3000 Americans dieing innocently in a blink of an eye? WAR IS HELL and we must do whatever we have to protect ourselves --they hate us, they want to kill us and will be rewarded fro doing so. You might feel differently if one of your loved ones had died on 9/11.

Why do I care if other socialist and communist countries hate us? By the way they are they same countries who's A$$e$ we saved in previous wars. They would not have survived but for the USA. And in response to W. above. THEY muddied the waters-THEY wear No uniform, have NO code of honor or ethics, ABIDE by NO treaties and HATE ALL AMERICANS! They are the religious zealots who will kill at ALL costs just like the kamakazii pilots. If anyone thinks the "rules" of war should be fair-get a grip. Let's all sit around the campfire and sing kumbaya-that will get us far.

My goodness it seems that Mr. Irritated is well irritated. He asks "Does anyone remember that we were attacked on our own soil". I would submit That George Bush didn't remember. He lost interest in Afghanstan and used the attack as an excuse to involve the U.S. in a costly and unneccessary war in Iraq while Bin Laden might still be planning evil in Afghanastan.

You're right-I am irritated. I'm not a George Bush fan either. He made some horrible mistakes and judgements, for sure. He took the opportunity to invade Iraq, based on false intellegence and bad advisement from Rumsfeld on how to run a war. We will never win their "hearts and minds" . What a joke. We will never convert them to Christianity-another joke. Bush blew it and Obama will too.

Add Comment

Name

Email

Homepage

In reply to

Comment

Phone*

What is nine plus one?

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:

Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.